Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    Wow, really? Are you sure? Not to be snide, but why would someone work an NBA concession stand for free? Those concession stands can get hectic and it's busy work, so why would someone volunteer to spend two hours of their night doing that if they weren't paid for it? It's not like volunteering for a church event or nonprofit entity out of the goodness of your heart. We're talking about an NBA corporation that makes money. I just have a hard time believing that the concession workers are volunteers. Those are the types of jobs that are paid in every other whelm of society. However, I could believe the Pacers not paying the workers out of their own pockets, i.e. leasing it to a concession operator who pays the employees.
    They work for charity donations. I asked a few people about it at the Detroit game. They said their group of 9 was likely to make $90 for their charity, TOTAL for the game. Indy is a volunteer state, couldn't see getting regular workers for free for every game. They said most of the concession workers are volunteering for charity.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

      BTW, I usually buy tickets off stubhub for games I don't get tickets too. I have a few connections so I would say I pay for half the games. Peck, when I'm sitting behind the hoop close to you, those are friends season tickets. Anyway, I was sitting club for the Detroit game because a buddy won an auction for 4 club tickets. The volunteer thing came up and I made a bet because I couldn't believe it. So I asked a few of the confession workers and they told me. That same game one of the employes in the green jackets asked us if we would like to upgrade to a few rows behind Detroit bench. It was great for us but I don't think Kimmy, Monroe, or Magette liked it too much.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

        No excuses. The Kings were able to hold better attendance during down years than the Pacers did. Having just gone to Sacto to see a game in person I can say that the city obviously isn't larger, the arena location is NOT CONVENIENT (unless you live out that way, it's not central/downtown), there is NO INDOOR PARKING (weather makes this not a big deal I guess), they play weekday games there too, the arena is very small in general, and while "neat" and "has character" it is not a draw itself like Conseco is. There is no good reason for a Kings/Suns game on WED night to draw any fans, and double that when you have ownership proglems (see Charlotte/Shinn). But instead they are killing themselves trying to hold on.


        "Too knowledgable"...BULLS***. I've been to too many games where fans boo CORRECT CALLS. In fact that's far more frequent than vice versa. In fact the whole "see, Lebron gets everything" angle is such crap. He does get some breaks and flops, but for f***s sake he just got called for traveling against Sam Young the other night and drew 4 fouls, so it's not like we've haven't seen him held accountable. Yet after EVERY GAME you have fans talking about how Team X got all the calls and it's such crap and so unfair. It's the exact opposite of "too knowledgeable". It's homerish. Every travel, carry, charge, or "block" by Roy with lots of contact gets filed under "well of course" and the instant it goes the other way it's "we haven't gotten a fair call all night". Childish.

        Now I moved my seats last year down toward the Pacers bench in and I've found that knowledge in this area is better. These are the regulars who are like us and very devoted to the Pacers. This is not a Hoosier who might like basketball but doesn't really follow the Pacers. And there is no freaking way anyone can intelligently suggest that Indiana HS or NCAA basketball features better refs or less home court calls, and double that in terms of the level of ability. Again it's almost like the game moves too fast and with too much nuance for the casual fan to follow and they just expect all contact on every play to be a home foul or a play on if it happens to the visitors.

        And if any fanbase could turn on the NBA due to bad ref work it would have been Sacto after the most famous set of questionable calls in the history of the NBA playoffs vs the Lakers. But they stuck with it anyway.



        I've long been frustrated with the fanbase, but with a losing record and a coach that made even me give up season tickets till they made a change, it was hard to be too upset. But the freaking brawl, or small town chip, or losing, or lack of good players, or lack of good product....time is up on those excuses. It's time to come to grips with the fact that in 49 other states it's just basketball but in Indiana it's just ignored.






        *please understand that NO ONE AT DIGEST fits this bill, if your friends and neighbors thought like you do then we'd have packed houses all the time, at least for the last 2 seasons due to the quality of coaching and players.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

          Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
          What he is saying is that for these reasons people listed, that INDY may not be an NBA city. People not coming to the games for whatever reason indicates that the city is not an NBA city. In an NBA city, people come to the games unless the team sucks and sometimes even when it does.

          All the reasons people gave, valid as they are, are also reasons the Pacers will end up the Sacramento Pacers. or the Las Vegas Pacers. or the Virginia Beach Pacers. No, people do not have to come to the game, but if they don't, they shouldn't be surprised when the team leaves town.
          This.

          And then I'll move too because it will be indicative of the small-minded mentality of the city in general and what prevents it from being as progressive as other cities, while also having a bizarre delusion that it is. I keep wanting to think there is enough of us to make a difference, but in the last 10 years or so I've started losing my faith that it can really change.


          Let's not forget that the PLAYOFF COLTS saw season ticket sales fall below 100% simply because Manning wasn't going to return. They lost the waiting list and then some. Then later all the "devoted" fans started hopping back on. Pathetic. I went to too many Colts games when they had good teams getting weak support too. The 90's showed how poorly good but not #1 teams not named IU get supported in this state.
          Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-03-2013, 05:19 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

            Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
            Monteith, Boyle and White get paid to go to these games, don't they? You and I don't. Most of us work all day and have to share our leisure time with a number of other functions.
            Said fans in EVERY FREAKING CITY IN THE COUNTRY.

            Only Indy has economic issues, either you work and can't get there in time or you don't have a job and can't afford it. Black magic keeps fans going to New Orleans games.


            Can someone bring up a reason that is NOT TRUE for other NBA cities? Anyone? And on top of that this is supposed to be Indiana, home of basketball love. We are supposed to need the fewest reasons to get out and see games, not more reasons than normal. It should take 50 problems to hold the fanbase back, way more than would keep fans away in Phoenix or Sacramento.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

              If the Pacers go to Sacramento do we all become Bulls fans?

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                This.
                And then I'll move too because it will be indicative of the small-minded mentality of the city in general and what prevents it from being as progressive as other cities, while also having a bizarre delusion that it is. I keep wanting to think there is enough of us to make a difference, but in the last 10 years or so I've started losing my faith that it can really change.
                Wow, are you saying the only reason you live in Indy is because of the Pacers? I know there are some really dedicated fans that have somewhat similar feelings (maybe our friend Gnome ) but Nap that's not even OCD normal.
                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                  Man, you talk about a thread full of melodrama. Good god Seth, take a Prozac.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    This.

                    And then I'll move too because it will be indicative of the small-minded mentality of the city in general and what prevents it from being as progressive as other cities, while also having a bizarre delusion that it is. I keep wanting to think there is enough of us to make a difference, but in the last 10 years or so I've started losing my faith that it can really change.


                    Let's not forget that the PLAYOFF COLTS say season ticket sales fall below 100% simply because Manning wasn't going to return. They lost the waiting list and then some. Then later all the "devoted" fans started hopping back on. Pathetic. I went to too many Colts games when they had good teams getting weak support too. The 90's showed how poorly good but not #1 teams not named IU get supported in this state.

                    The Colts only lost 13% of their season ticket holders. You make it sound like they lost 50%. 87% of the ticket holders were willing to keep supporting the team without Manning. That's pretty high. You have to also figure that there is going to be x% every year who don't renew because of reasons that have nothing to do with football (can't afford them anymore, move away from Indiana, etc etc). The Colts parted with one of the greatest players ever and suffered a pathetic 2-14 season, yet almost 90% of the fans decided to stick with the franchise. How is that small-minded? How is that not being loyal? There hasn't been a single blackout in almost ten years. We've played two years without Manning and haven't blacked out a game. That's being a good fan base.

                    How does Indy have a small-minded mentality? It just hosted the Super Bowl and will be bidding on another. I know that hosting a Super Bowl isn't the end all and be all of everything, but it shows that the city is constantly trying to improve its image. What more could the city of Indianapolis possibly due for the Pacers? They gave them a nice taxpayer funded arena, let them use it rent free, gave them 30 million a few years back and another 10 million this year. Indianapolis has done nothing but cater to the Pacers for years and the fans supported them for many years. The Pacers have to take accountability for the fact that they were a poorly run franchise for several years. The brawl, off the court incidents, and general poor play turned people off. Maybe diehards were still interested, but casual fans who aren't obsessed with the NBA aren't going to watch a crappy product.

                    In 2005, for example, the Pacers averaged more fans than the Celtics. This is despite the fact that Boston has a larger arena and is also bigger than Indy by millions and millions of people. The Pacers should never average more fans than Boston in a season, but they did. The Celtics are the team of championships, Bird, Russell, etc, yet no one gave a damn about them in the mid 2000's because there were better shows in town in the Pats and Sox. It was only with the addition of the Big 3 that Boston began caring about the Celtics again. It should also be noted that the Patriots had pathetic attendance in the early 90's before Robert Kraft bought the team and produced a better product. So don't let Boston fans fool you. They are no different than any other fan base, despite being one of the largest metros in the country. The bottom line is that people don't want to watch crappy NBA basketball.

                    http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/year/2005

                    Indy has proven that it isn't "small-minded" by its diehard support of the Colts in recent years. 87% of fans, or roughly 9 out of 10, decided that they were willing to give the Colts a chance without one of the most famous players ever. It has been almost 10 years since the last blackout. The Colts are a franchise who has consistently rewarded their fans. The Pacers OTOH have been putting out a great product for two seasons, but that was after many seasons of pathetic play and off the court incidents which ruined the franchise's image. The Pacers have to take accountability for the fact that they turned people off. Casual observers simply aren't going to waste their money on the crap the Pacers were producing. But people have noticed the improvement and the crowds are more lively than they used to be.

                    The 7 o'clock weeknight tip offs are part of the problem. If you live on the north side of Indy or in Hamilton County and get off work downtown at 5 o'clock, then you basically have to hang around downtown for two hours before the game. Driving home would certainly be a complete waste of time. By the time you get home, it's ten o'clock and you've been gone for like 14 straight hours. That might sound wimpy to a diehard fan, but if you're a casual person who doesn't care that much, are you going to hang around downtown for all those hours just to see the Pacers beat up on the Pistons on a cold Wednesday night? No, you'll wait till they play someone on a Friday.

                    I don't see what you mean by Indy not being "progressive". Indy might not be NY or San Francisco, but I see a city that is constantly improving. Apartment complexes are always popping up downtown. Neighborhoods are improving and nice restaurants are always opening. Indy has an incredible selection of ethnic restaurants. It also has great museums. Indy is always spending money to improve the city. It's far from small minded.
                    Last edited by Sollozzo; 02-03-2013, 05:43 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                      The brawl years turned everyone away. That mixed with not having a Reggie level player has cause the fans not to all come back. But it keeps getting better and better. People are talking about the team. If they have a nice run this year, the fans will be back. Especially if PG has a breakout playoff performance.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                        [QUOTE=Sollozzo;1578391]The Colts only lost 13% of their season ticket holders. You make it sound like they lost 50%. 87% of the ticket holders were willing to keep supporting the team without Manning. That's pretty high.

                        That is not quite right. The Colts lost 13% of their season ticket holders but all of the people who had been on a waiting list for years. I will admit they kept more than I thought they would. But, if that team has two or three bad seasons, you will see that number come down..... ...

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                          Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                          The brawl years turned everyone away. That mixed with not having a Reggie level player has cause the fans not to all come back. But it keeps getting better and better. People are talking about the team. If they have a nice run this year, the fans will be back. Especially if PG has a breakout playoff performance.
                          My contention is that they are already back for the most part. We are really only 2K off of our normal high attendance record (minus the opening season of BLF which was a total sell out before the season started).

                          Casual fans are not going to show up mid week in sub arctic temps to watch the Wizards, Bobcats, Raptors, Cavaliers, Kings, Wolves, etc.

                          Bring the Knicks, Nets, Bulls, Heat, Lakers, Clippers, Thunder, etc. to town and you will see a full house.

                          Guess what, other than N.Y., Chicago, L.A. & a few other select markets it the exact same way. Watch a Philly game on a Tuesday vs one of the first named teams here & tell me you see every seat full. Now bring the second group in and it is.

                          Did we not just have a sell out?

                          Look I get the die hards are still mad about the fan base turning against the franchise after the brawl but the only thing we can do is try and move beyond it and get better & IMO we are doing exactly that.


                          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                            Originally posted by OlBlu

                            That is not quite right. The Colts lost 13% of their season ticket holders but all of the people who had been on a waiting list for years. I will admit they kept more than I thought they would. But, if that team has two or three bad seasons, you will see that number come down..... ...
                            They didn't lose all of the people who had been on the waiting list. The 13% was filled by a lot of people on the waiting list. Regardless, 87% made the decision to come back. The team didn't blackout a game. They haven't had a blackout since 2003. In the two seasons without Manning, every single game has sold out.

                            IF IF IF IF IF IF. Ifs are only ifs. The actual concrete results speak for themselves, and they show that the Colts brand and popularity has remained unscathed without Manning. But that's what happens when you're a top notch organization that consistently rewards your fans.
                            Last edited by Sollozzo; 02-03-2013, 06:01 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                              Does that mean the Limo, suite seating and free food and drink plus the $100 offer is off the table? Rats.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers eventually to end up in Sacramento?

                                But at the end of the day it's not a problem. You don't build a league best scoreboard, sound-system and upgrade every TV in an arena you could imagine leaving. Where could they possibly get a better deal? Indy does anything for their sports teams. When you look at teams leaving, it's never about the fans, it's about the cities not caving to team demands.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X